Sharing Facilities and Administrative Cost Recovery to Facilitate Interdisciplinary Research

Abstract

Purpose-Despite increasing interest in interdisciplinary research, researchers consistently cite institutional barriers as deterrents. Researchers, administrators, and others have suggested developing processes for sharing facilities and administrative (F&A) cost recovery as one way to support collaborative research. Therefore, the authors reviewed current policies for sharing F&A cost recovery and user satisfaction with them.Method-In 2010, through reviewing institutional Websites and surveying researchers and grants administrators from a range of institutions, the authors identified a number of different policies currently employed and assessed user satisfaction with them.Results-While most respondents (80.7%, 205/254) agreed that a standard policy for sharing F&A cost recovery would facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration, only 35.4% (90/254) reported that their institutions had such a policy. Among the 85 respondents whose institutions had a policy, most (66 [77.6%]) reported that the policy applied to grants with multiple principal investigators or co-investigators across departments or schools, and 68 (80.0%) reported satisfaction with the policy. Respondents from institutions with policies were significantly more likely to endorse the notion that policies are helpful compared to those who reported that their institutions did not have such policies or were unsure of their existence (89% versus 76%, P = Correspondence should be addressed to Ms. Kulage, Columbia University School of Nursing, 630 West 168 th Street, Box 6, New York, NY 10032; telephone: (212) 305-5495; fax: (212) 305-6020; kk729@columbia.edu. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.Other disclosures: None.Ethical approval: The survey was approved by the Columbia University Institutional Review Board as an exempt protocol.Disclaimer: The content of this report is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of National Center for Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of Columbia University or the National Council of University Research Administrators. Conclusions-These data support the need for institutions to establish formal policies for sharing F&A cost recovery as a way to promote interdisciplinary research collaboration. NIH Public AccessDespite increasing interest in interdisciplinary and translational research on the part of researchers and funding agencies,1 -3 researchers have consistently cited inst...

From Free to Free Market: Cost Recovery in Federally Funded Clinical Research

“…Under the CTSA mechanism, however, the expected scope of the program has been broadened, and cost recovery from research studies using CSC resources is now allowed. Streaming the funding directly to the principle investigator (PI) empowers them to take their clinical research to the most efficient service provider and introduces a “free market” element that could reduce waste and encourage cost-sharing of institutional resources (10). Such a move presents major challenges to institutional CSCs, the most notable of which is the need to restructure and share the associated costs and risks of the research instead of simply providing a zero-cost service.…”

Associating co-authorship patterns with publications in high-impact journals

“…Numerous organizational factors have been recognized as barriers or facilitators of interdisciplinary research [2]. Although there are significant challenges in projects spanning multiple departments or disciplines [3], interdisciplinary research has been shown to be important for accelerating innovation [4]. …”

Resource Allocation in Academic Health Centers: Creating Common Metrics

“…For example, there has not been substantial research on educational epidemiology, to use the term suggested in 2004 by Carney et al 16 That is, there has been limited application across the physician and health professional education continuum of observational and randomized experimental designs to probe best practices. In the research arena, despite the availability of data sources and modes of analysis that are common across institutions, and an array of aspirations which are widely shared, 17 there is little or no coordinated effort to use the data to derive "best" or even "common" practices. Arguably, a centralized process and organization is needed to coordinate this endeavor.…”